I love it - after telling I-69 opponents not to vote for Libertarians, the newspaper - and I assume Kurt Van der Dussen again; I wish they would admit it! - now claims that every single opponent of the highway must have voted for them. Here's what I wrote to the editor in response:
After a long battle, it seems fairly clear that the issue of I-69 has resulted in a victory for big business interests over consumers, and the highway will be built. Those who continue to fight on must surely console themselves with the adage that the only cause worth fighting for is a lost one.
But the Herald-Times' position on this issue has moved beyond "supportive" to "obsessive" and maybe even as far as "flaky." Almost the only mention of the highway in the last month has been on the editorial page, first by telling highway opponents not to vote for a tiny third party, and later, bizarrely, by claiming that the tiny third party's tiny vote totals must have represented all the opponents. For my part, I suspect that many voters found the arguments in the first editorial compelling, although judging from the second the H-T must not have thought so.
Still, those who are against the highway can do nothing less than thank the Herald-Times for keeping the issue in the public eye. No cause is ever truly lost until it is no longer talked about.
There is a 200-word limit; this is about 190 words. I worked for a while trying to get in some points about the Libertarians, and how the number of people who were even aware of Gividen's anti-highway position was probably pretty small, but I decided to keep on message for this one. (I can write one letter per month, maybe next time!)